Killings seen on US TV, social media prompt ethical debate
ON Wednesday morning, Alison Parker, 24, a reporter at US television station WDBJ, and her cameraman, Adam Ward, 27, were shot and killed by a former colleague during a live television broadcast. The murderer recorded the slayings and posted it on Twitter
In a piece with the headline “Should you use the video and the fax from the WDBJ shooting?”, American journalist Al Tompkins said that the public nature of the shooting raised several questions about media ethics, including the use of graphic images of the incident in news stories and television broadcasts.
“I’ve attempted to provide some guidance here for news directors and editors trying to make sense of the violence,” he wrote. “A number of journalists have asked me if I thought it was ethical to use the video of the shooting on air and online. My answer is, ‘It all depends’.
“It depends on why you are using the video and how you will use it and how long you will use it.”
Tompkins explained that “we know now that the video itself is news – not just because it shows the shooting, but also because it appears to show the shooter. That is reason enough to show the video in some way, but consider alternatives.”
He said that in the immediate hours after the shooting, the video (complete with horrific audio) was news because the “what” of the story was still unfolding. As the story turned to “why,” the graphic video became less newsworthy, he said.
The options for showing the video were unedited with audio; show footage up to the moment that screaming begins and cut the audio but continue the video; use the video with no audio; use still frames and no video; and use none of the images.
A relatively small audience witnessed the tragic event unfold live on TV in the morning. But Internet users around the world quickly also became witnesses to this crime after the killer fired off tweets while on the run and posted his sickening video online.
CBS News tweeted: “How social media played a central role in the deadly #WDBJ shooting: http://cbsn.ws/1MVQxnK pic.twitter.com/1av4AIWTYq.”
In a news report entitled “In shooting on live TV, social media played central role”, CBS News reported that social media on Wednesday was flooded with images and videos of the deadly shooting.
As the tragedy unfolded, social media platforms like Twitter were used in their traditional way to share information and post messages of grief and anger.
The video of the murders was shared on social media platforms before killer Vester Lee Flanagan’s Twitter and Facebook accounts were closed.
CBS News also pointed out that instead of being a vehicle to spread news, social media became a platform for a killer to share his crime with millions of Twitter and Facebook users.
Mike Leslie, a WFAA sports reporter at @wfaachannel8 in Dallas, called on people via Twitter not to share the video and shared this link: http://m.wdbj7.com/news/local/law-enforcement-investigating-incident-at-bridgewater-plaza/34923086 [Two WDBJ7 employees shot and killed; suspected shooter kills himself.].
In Thailand, some media outlets, especially TV stations, showed the video. But others opted not to show it.
Viriya Satien, news editor of PPTV, said on his Facebook page that his team discussed whether to air it, but were in total agreement that doing so would not be fair to the victims’ families.
“We cropped still photos and chose to report the latest movements,” he said.
“We saw other TV stations also chose not to use the video on air and online. Instead they chose to report the story and the background of the shooting.
“We are glad to see many TV stations in Thailand chose not to air the video. We all should maintain our standard because the quality of TV reflects the quality of society.”
Indeed. The freedom of the press comes with the need to cover events responsibly.
